for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Vacchiano claims Giants think Kyler Murray is...

Mike in St. Louis : 2/11/2019 4:13 pm
too small...

"A team source told SNY's Ralph Vacchiano that Oklahoma QB Kyler Murray is "probably a little too small" for the Giants.

The Giants "prefer to stick to the established measurables they have for a prototypical quarterback," Vacchiano notes. The Giants' organization emphasizes conventional wisdom and inside-the-box thinking, and they haven't started a quarterback that measures below 6-feet since 5-foot-11 Gary Wood went 0-6 in 1966. And "the philosophy hasn't changed all that much (in that over half-century timeframe)," Vacchiano confirms. 6-foot-3 Dwayne Haskins, 6-foot-4 Drew Lock, and 6-foot-5 Daniel Jones appear to be likelier candidates to succeed 6-foot-4 Eli Manning than 5-foot-9 Murray."

Source: SNY.com
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 <<Prev | Show All |  Next>>
I can be as critical  
lax counsel : 2/11/2019 9:46 pm : link
Of the Giants as anyone. However, I’m not sure the Giants being fearful of a qbs size is an indictment on their analytics process. I also have no idea how Vacchiano would know or measure any of this. I think it’s fair to say that a qb the size of Murray having a long and successful career in this league is relatively unprecedented and certainly not in the spot where the Giants would draft him. Again, not sure how you can indict the Giants analytics process on this report, even if true.
Ok so you see a quote like this  
NoGainDayne : 2/11/2019 9:48 pm : link
Quote:
Michael Lombardi (@mlombardiNFL)
2/11/19, 4:24 PM
The Giants have used the same grading system since George Young took over and in that system, they would have a hard time giving Murray a high grade. the system is designed to prevent the team from being small--its all about size and speed.


Please enlighten me as to how thoughts citing this as another reason for concern are more out of place than those suggesting we shouldn’t be concerned.
RE: LOL..  
Jay on the Island : 2/11/2019 9:57 pm : link
In comment 14293933 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
Sure:



Quote:


Just like here. Hearing from a reporter that covers the team that your team is essentially stuck in the past isn't the time or place to come in and tell us how wrong those of us that are concerned are.



Just like here?? You mean the thread where a reporter talks about Murray likely being too small to be the Giants pick and that's spurs all sorts of criticism of Gettleman and Shurmur?

And your takeaway? That there's no deeper analysis than the player is too small, even though you have no fucking clue what the reasoning behind it is.

You mean a thread like this that causes all sorts of knee-jerk reactions?

Just like here - a thread that gives just one more platform to tell us how shitty Gettleman and Shurmur are, even though that isn't the point. Great example Captain Analytics

We both know that if the Giants do surprise everyone and take Murray the same people who bashed DG for "going all in with Eli" will turn around and bash him for taking a 5'9 QB in the first round.
Enlighten..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/11/2019 10:00 pm : link
you? Are you sure you want enlightenment since you obviously ignored what was posted above:

Quote:
“We’re gonna have what I call a philosophical and method shift on how we operate, yes,’’ Gettleman told The Post. “The philosophy is the way of looking at players, and the method is how we set up the draft board

. Under Reese and Ross, the Giants were often drawn to height-weight-speed prospects who too frequently went bust rather than boom. It is believed Gettleman will bring the emphasis back to production on the field — stressing passion, desire and mechanics rather than raw talent.

This will be reflected in how players are actually placed on the Giants’ draft board. Gettleman took a look at how the Panthers graded players, preferred that system to what he knew with the Giants, and retained it in Charlotte. Now he is bringing it to the Giants.

“Putting your focus on different things, the board is gonna look very different,’’ Gettleman said. “It’s actually something I learned in Carolina. There’s an old saying: Every man is my equal, in that I may learn from him. These guys taught me a different way of looking at it — not how to evaluate, not how to do it philosophically, but just a different way of setting up a board, and I think it’s terrific.’’

Gettleman would not get into specifics, but agreed the new draft board will more accurately display how an individual players’ grade relates to others on the board.

“It gives you not only a vertical view but also a horizontal view as well,’’ he said. “It allows you to really see the board, without giving anything up.’’
All NFL teams — other than the Patriots, not surprisingly — hire one of two scouting services, National Football Scouting or Blesto, to get a better handle on college juniors. The Giants are with Blesto. Teams usually assign one of their young, inexperienced scouts to these services, and one of Gettleman’s first jobs was as the Blesto scout for the Bills. When Gettleman got to Carolina, one of his first moves was to switch the Panthers from National to Blesto.


Gettleman hasn't changed anything I guess.

You don't want enlightenment. You want to believe Gettleman uses an abacus, steals analytics guy's lunch money and yells "get off my lawn" to nerds with spreadsheets.
And yet  
djm : 2/11/2019 10:00 pm : link
No one had us taking Evan Engram or apple or even flowers. Some did maybe, but cmon already. Just because 5 outlets out of 33 predicted the right first round pick doesn’t mean the giants couldn’t keep a secret.

As for the Barkley thing, that’s hilarious. So since most correctly Barkley to the giants that means what exactly? How can you stop people from predicting rain when it’s already cloudy out?

I’ve seen you post about that many times  
NoGainDayne : 2/11/2019 10:16 pm : link
This quote I posted above the new information.

Gettleman also said he expected the team to be good this year. But that’s just like “what you have to say”

Couldn’t him saying he is changing things up also he “what you have to say”

He didn’t go into specifics and again he kept most of the staff in place so what do we have to go on other than his yammering mouth

The same yammering mouth that disregarded analytics and suggested Stewart hadn’t lost a step as supporting his point.

The Gettleman applogists also seem to get to decide if he’s telling the truth, if he’s joking, they even get to read his mind in the case of Stewart being a locker room signing or a spy as some have suggested. And him being fired and out of a job shouldn’t be held against him.

No, no. It’s the people that are taking what a reporter says at face value commenting on this new news that are out of line to talk about that on that thread. It’s you that is coming on the thread spouting old information and using it to support the same points you already held.
RE: Another viewpoint  
SHO'NUFF : 2/11/2019 10:22 pm : link
In comment 14293694 Defenderdawg said:
Quote:
Michael Lombardi (@mlombardiNFL)
2/11/19, 4:24 PM
The Giants have used the same grading system since George Young took over and in that system, they would have a hard time giving Murray a high grade. the system is designed to prevent the team from being small--its all about size and speed.


This is false. They've always been about size, but not speed. They're ok with big, slow linebackers.
RE: The only..  
christian : 2/11/2019 10:34 pm : link
In comment 14293784 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
thing less out of the box than the Giants reported way of doing things is that this thread would serve mainly as a platform to bash them by the usual suspects.


Genuine question; when would it be appropriate to start bashing the team?

Is there a breaking point where the fans have a right to turn?
One more thing to the supposition  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 12:10 am : link
that just because Gettleman says he’s changing things he actually did.

What was he supposed to say after one of the worst seasons in Giants history. “I’m just going to keep things mostly the same”

Again. The way the changeover happened and lack of turnover there is way more evidence that it remained the same than changed.

We also heard that this offseason they might expand the analytics department instead we get news like this.

RE: RE: The only..  
SHO'NUFF : 2/12/2019 4:45 am : link
In comment 14293960 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14293784 FatMan in Charlotte said:


Quote:


thing less out of the box than the Giants reported way of doing things is that this thread would serve mainly as a platform to bash them by the usual suspects.



Genuine question; when would it be appropriate to start bashing the team?

Is there a breaking point where the fans have a right to turn?


Aren't we past that point already?
RE: One more thing to the supposition  
section125 : 2/12/2019 5:06 am : link
In comment 14293989 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
that just because Gettleman says he’s changing things he actually did.

What was he supposed to say after one of the worst seasons in Giants history. “I’m just going to keep things mostly the same”

Again. The way the changeover happened and lack of turnover there is way more evidence that it remained the same than changed.

We also heard that this offseason they might expand the analytics department instead we get news like this.


No change? - only 15 or 16 players remain from 2017. 70% change over in one season. Not sure what you call change but the average NFL turnover is about 30%.
Dave Brown was 6'5"  
Heisenberg : 2/12/2019 7:36 am : link
.
If this disfunctional org  
Coach Red Beaulieu : 2/12/2019 8:05 am : link
Continues to hire wco coaches, then Murray would be a system fit.

I love it, maybe some misdirection from DG unlike constantly getting jumped Reese?
Probably the opposite is true...  
M.S. : 2/12/2019 8:43 am : link

...the Giants organization is pimping Vacchiano to spread a false narrative that may give a team pause before trading up in front of the Giants to snag Kyler Murray.

IMO, Vacchiano's information is the first clue that the Giants are indeed targeting Murray and would fall all over themselves if he there's at #6.


A..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 8:47 am : link
"yammering mouth"? Holy shit you really are dense:

Quote:
He didn’t go into specifics and again he kept most of the staff in place so what do we have to go on other than his yammering mouth

The same yammering mouth that disregarded analytics and suggested Stewart hadn’t lost a step as supporting his point.


When Gettleman was hired, the draft preparation and scouting was already well down the road. That's why most of the staff was kept in place, but does that really matter?

Here's what you've done in the past several months:
- Latched onto a comment by Gettleman to then make the assertion he shuns analytics.
- When pointed out that Gettleman instituted an analytics team in Carolina, your response wasn't "Gee. I didn't know that", it was "Starting a team doesn't mean shit. He doesn't know what he's doing".
- When pointed out that Gettleman's assistant in Carolina, who became the GM in Buffalo also started an analytic team, your response wasn't "Gee, I didn't know that", it was "The guy they hired, knows nothing about analytics!", a claim made by looking at his LinkedIn profile. (And unfortunately, I'm not kidding about that)

Now, you are trying to state that Gettleman hasn't made any changes, despite an article that specifically outlines what changes he's made.

Maybe you should stick to drawing conclusions from LinkedIn profiles. It still sucks balls, but maybe it would be like throwing a cat a ball of yarn to keep them occupied for awhile.
RE: Probably the opposite is true...  
Gatorade Dunk : 2/12/2019 10:00 am : link
In comment 14294163 M.S. said:
Quote:

...the Giants organization is pimping Vacchiano to spread a false narrative that may give a team pause before trading up in front of the Giants to snag Kyler Murray.

IMO, Vacchiano's information is the first clue that the Giants are indeed targeting Murray and would fall all over themselves if he there's at #6.


After years of being painfully transparent with their draft intentions, now the Giants (and Gettleman, who was just as transparent with Carolina) are running a disinformation campaign before the combine even happens?

It's amazing how much credit fans are willing to give the Giants FO when it suits their desired outcome. I know I was just as guilty of it last year when I was convinced that they were going to take a QB at #2 despite all evidence to the contrary.
I'm dense??  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 10:16 am : link
You are the one that gets his jollies picking on people online and then when someone actually challenges you in real terms you twist facts to try to make back ground when the points have been clearly made, but i'll make them again using the summary format you

Quote:
When Gettleman was hired, the draft preparation and scouting was already well down the road. That's why most of the staff was kept in place, but does that really matter?

Ok so good should we expect front office changes and hires this off-season? That would be great, I've said it would be great. Many times. Others have pointed out that you could very easily build out an anlytics process in parallel to your regular scouting process. Again, I will point out this Steelers hire as an example of a way that an organization can begin this commitment with one hire.



Here's what you've done in the past several months:

Quote:
- Latched onto a comment by Gettleman to then make the assertion he shuns analytics.
Again I need to point out here that i'm not latching onto anything, you don't have clips of other GMs mocking analytics. This has to be taken seriously, there are literally articles written about him shunning analytics. Even if there was evidence was building out a modern analytics program with the Giants (there isn't) it still will hamper any recruiting process to get the right people if there is footage of you talking like this. And again the idea that we have a secret program is ridiculous as there is tons of information out on the Patriots who clearly are doing something very right and there is lots of information out about what they are doing. They have by far the largest incentive to be secretive.

There are other reasons to suggest that Gettleman shuns analytics but here is another quote from Defenderdog

“Football is about watching film when they’re between the white lines,” Gettleman said. “You’ve got to be patient and you have to watch. And the other part of it is, you have to know what you are looking for.”

This is even after he started building the vaunted analytics program in Carolina you are talking about. Again, many other people and not just me have pointed out there is a difference between buying into the value of something and putting a little money behind it. There isn't a company in the world that doesn't have software developers now but there are many different attitudes towards those developers at the top.


Quote:
- When pointed out that Gettleman instituted an analytics team in Carolina, your response wasn't "Gee. I didn't know that", it was "Starting a team doesn't mean shit. He doesn't know what he's doing".
Believe it or not I do a lot of my own research. None of what you say is ever a surprise to me. I just pointed out that the best organizations have a strong leader that understand analytics, have an advanced math or computer science degree or bare minimum databases. I've shared articles talking about how analytics inside Goldman Sachs has changed drastically in the last 5 years giving more and people with these kinds of skills running trading operations yet you act like football is some insurmountable analytics mountain. I have said and I stand by that, hiring developers don't mean that you have the right ones and it is unlikely that they will be doing actual valuable work especially when their boss is saying such dismissive things about said work publicly. It's simply a comparative thing, you have many successful organizations talking about how much analytics are now helping their process then you have the Giants GM making fun of them and reporters talking about how our process hasn't changed very much.


Quote:
- When pointed out that Gettleman's assistant in Carolina, who became the GM in Buffalo also started an analytic team, your response wasn't "Gee, I didn't know that", it was "The guy they hired, knows nothing about analytics!", a claim made by looking at his LinkedIn profile. (And unfortunately, I'm not kidding about that)
You keep saying this is a joke like it's supposed to be insulting to me but if you look at the profiles and information out there about people working in analytics for other teams their profiles are more impressive. You might live in a world when there wasn't this type of information out there and it wasn't useful but i'm not the only one that pointed out this is a fine way to evaluate technical people. McL backed me up on this and wrote a lot about it himself. Siam our "rising" star, doesn't have the kinds of skills you want for someone in analytics. Much like our discussion above, you don't have any incentive to not put your most current qualifications on LinkedIn as a technical person. A quick glance at Sean Harrington of the Patriots vs. Siam makes this point in spades.

Sean Harrington

Ty Siam


Quote:
Now, you are trying to state that Gettleman hasn't made any changes, despite an article that specifically outlines what changes he's made.
Excuse me while I LOLOLOL in your face about this. This is a quote from the article that you conveniently left out "“You got to realize we’re all gonna go back to our roots,’’ also Gettleman is the source of this article. Again what do you want him to say? "We are just going to keep things mostly the same coming off one of the worst seasons in our history" I'm pointing out that very few personnel changes were made, no new analytical people have been hired. You are talking about an article specifically outlining things but the article is anything but specific and even says this "Gettleman would not get into specifics, but agreed the new draft board will more accurately display how an individual players’ grade relates to others on the board." We do not have the same definition of specific, and if you think this article is specific than I don't think you know what that word means. This article is extremely vague. Here is a quote from Gettleman “It gives you not only a vertical view but also a horizontal view as well,’’

Here is a quote from Jeff Goldblum giving acting tips to Joey on Friends "Also, what you did was horizontal. Don't be afraid to explore the vertical. And don't learn the words. Let the words learn you.”

Gettleman's quote doesn't mean anything. Am I really to understand that the old scouting process made it difficult to compare players at the same position? That's how this quote could be interpreted if you would like to actually pretend it means anything and that seems insane to me.


Quote:
Maybe you should stick to drawing conclusions from LinkedIn profiles. It still sucks balls, but maybe it would be like throwing a cat a ball of yarn to keep them occupied for awhile.
Maybe I should try your past time of being a dick to random people on the internet pretending i'm smart to cover up the actual horrific truth that I am a mediocre person whose only real skill in life is aggressively asserting their intelligence even in subject matters others are clearly more well informed about. It wasn't just me on these threads, others came in and supported my points that in reading these LinkedIn profiles and looking at the qualifications of people on the teams the Giants were lagging and didn't have anyone staffed on the team with the proper analytical skills or degrees to do the job properly.

The craziest part of your assertion is that you seemingly want to argue simultaneously that the problem is too hard to solve and having less qualified people staffed on our team is somehow a sufficient way to be competitive with teams moving forward in technology? Which one is it???
jesus christ that's a wall of text  
Ten Ton Hammer : 2/12/2019 10:22 am : link
.
That was a lot..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 10:35 am : link
of words that basically changed nothing about the fact you've been shown examples of change and refuse to accept them. Well done.

I'll just skip to the bottom and wonder what the fuck this pertains to?

Quote:
The craziest part of your assertion is that you seemingly want to argue simultaneously that the problem is too hard to solve and having less qualified people staffed on our team is somehow a sufficient way to be competitive with teams moving forward in technology? Which one is it???


Where have I ever said that the problem is too hard to solve or even draw comparisons to teams "moving forward with technology"??

Hell, you are the same dolt who claimed that most teams are using PFF's ratings as one analytical tool.

Again - my limited contribution has been to tell you that Gettleman, a man who shuns analytics, developed the analytics team in Carolina and mentored his former assistant GM to do the same in Buffalo. And when being shown that those two things happened, you aren't backtracking on the idea Gettleman shuns analytics, but you actually double-down on the ridiculous idea. Then you try to discredit that the analytics teams are worth anything for those two clubs.

Here's what you don't get. You went from saying Gettleman doesn't use analytics to trolling LinkedIn profiles to assert people are unqualified. You acted like an expert that Gettleman wasn't associated with analytics (based on a quote) and instead of acknowledging that you knew absolutely nothing about Carolina or Buffalo you shit all over them - and still don't have any fucking clue what those teams are doing!!

On top of that, when shown an excerpt of an article detailing changes Gettleman has made, you dismiss it, but still cling to a quote that mocked analytics as evidence he shuns them

Analytics is supposed to take data to make better decisions. You ignore data to make terrible decisions, yet are the supposed expert.

LOL
I did know what they were doing in those places  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 10:40 am : link
it just wasn't impressive at all.

And you lost the debates on those threads yet you bring it up after as if you did or you had points.

Your summaries are terrible and that's why I had to write a lot to address them. Because they were awful and slanted entirely towards the points you wanted to make.

Like everything you write.

I'm done talking to you forever. Bye.
FMiC,  
RollBlue : 2/12/2019 10:48 am : link
you're a smart guy, and as a fellow Engineer, I know you think logically. So having said that, I don't how, after going 5-11 last year, and still having no clue on the future at QB, you can state definitively that taking Barkley over Darold was not a mistake.

We will know the answer for sure in 4-5 years. If the Giants are still stumbling along and the Jets have unseated the Pats in the AFC East.......

Barkley's a great player and I'm glad to have him. I still think that taking Darnold will play better in the long run. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
You absolutely..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 10:56 am : link
did not:

Quote:
I did know what they were doing in those places
NoGainDayne : 10:40 am : link : reply
it just wasn't impressive at all.


You claimed that Gettleman shunned analytics. You said he had done nothing with Carolina or NY. I had to actually post an article detailing what he did to refute it. Being in Carolina and having ties to the team, I knew that they had actually done stuff. That's how I entered this debate in the first place!!

But I'm glad to see that above you've stuck to posting LinkedIn profiles to try and support your position. Compelling evidence indeed!
RE: I did know what they were doing in those places  
bw in dc : 2/12/2019 11:18 am : link
In comment 14294373 NoGainDayne said:
Quote:
it just wasn't impressive at all.

And you lost the debates on those threads yet you bring it up after as if you did or you had points.

Your summaries are terrible and that's why I had to write a lot to address them. Because they were awful and slanted entirely towards the points you wanted to make.

Like everything you write.

I'm done talking to you forever. Bye.


Look, Gettleman is Fatman's guy. He's fully vested. He's mentioned that he has some ties to the team. Perhaps he has met him, likes him, and is glad he's here.

I don't doubt Gettleman has access to modern analytics/data. Whether he fully incorporates them into decision making would be my question. He seems like a guy who, at the end of the day, will ultimately rely on his gut instincts over data.

Shook his..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 11:21 am : link
hand once. Wasn't in the area of the building I'm normally in.

And I'm not "all-in" on Gettleman. I think is it patently absurd that the guy has been torn to shreds by people here since Day 1 - after a "sham" hire, and even the moves he's made that look very good are outright dismissed as being bad.
Had a feeling  
RinR : 2/12/2019 11:59 am : link
the "inside-the-box thinking" comment would rile some of you up.
RE: RE: I did know what they were doing in those places  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 1:27 pm : link
In comment 14294415 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 14294373 NoGainDayne said:


Quote:


Look, Gettleman is Fatman's guy. He's fully vested. He's mentioned that he has some ties to the team. Perhaps he has met him, likes him, and is glad he's here.

I don't doubt Gettleman has access to modern analytics/data. Whether he fully incorporates them into decision making would be my question. He seems like a guy who, at the end of the day, will ultimately rely on his gut instincts over data.


The point that I think is important and I've made time and time again is that everyone has access to modern analytics and data but access isn't the way you build for the future.

Integrating it into your decision making is only part of it as well. Almost every organization leveraging technology well has and has had a strong technology leader with knowledge of databases, advanced math, computer science, agile development / product management and principles of creative innovation like those espoused in the lean startup. Many, many companies even separate out their innovation areas because of people like Gettleman. There isn't any evidence we have people in the building with any of these skills let alone an assortment.

The other main component I've talked about is reinforcement learning and I've shared this article about Chess Centaurs building for the future on these problems, even something as simple a game theory problem like when to take timeouts is aided heavily by reinforcement learning. To fully leverage this takes years, years we are already behind where you first have to figure out ways to encode your qualitative decision making process before you can even start to compare it along side your quantitative one. This is undoubtedly what the hire I point out in Pittsburgh Kassam has been doing since 2014 and the Patriots have a large operation going with the right people in regards to this.

Me and other people with knowledge of analytics have struck at the staffing the Giants have as well as some of the things he says as a concerning amount of information that even if he sees the information he hasn't seemed to grasp what needs to go into getting an edge vs. seeing things that every other team has access to. No, nothing is ever definitive but there seems to be far, far more evidence that the Giants are behind in this regard and not doing much to catch up and get an edge than they even fully comprehend the process of what it will take to get there. And that's by far the most frightening part to me and should scare all of us fans.
To put Murry's height in perspective....  
nzyme : 2/12/2019 6:31 pm : link
Baker Mayfield is roughly 5 inches TALLER than Murray. Not promising...
RE: To put Murry's height in perspective....  
Ssanders9816 : 2/12/2019 6:36 pm : link
In comment 14294836 nzyme said:
Quote:
Baker Mayfield is roughly 5 inches TALLER than Murray. Not promising...


Also not true
RE: To put Murry's height in perspective....  
Eli Wilson : 2/12/2019 6:38 pm : link
In comment 14294836 nzyme said:
Quote:
Baker Mayfield is roughly 5 inches TALLER than Murray. Not promising...


I think your math is off by a couple inches.

...  
christian : 2/12/2019 6:59 pm : link
Gettleman did a lot his first year; huge roster turnover upfront, lots of signings, cuts etc., lots of money spent (a fact under scrutinized, especially when Reese spent about the same it was a "splurge.")

The result was 2 more wins, and as of now a half dozen or so clear longterm improvements; Barkley, Hernandez, Hill, Carter, and then Ogletree and Solder you'd be right to qualify given the salaries.

So is this confusing activity with accomplishment or slow improvement?

I'd say a very incomplete until this offseason where he likely won't get ~100M in guaranteed money to spend and 4 top 70 picks.

If he can land 6 more core players without the good hand he had last time around, that's something.

He had some softballs this offseason that don't indicate sophisticated analysis one way or another.
RE: People need to be reminded 10x every offseason  
djm : 2/12/2019 7:25 pm : link
In comment 14293680 Sy'56 said:
Quote:
Do not believe what you read in the media in regard to teams and their grades.

Reporters need clicks.


Don’t even bother. This shit has already grown wings around here.
I mean come on already !  
djm : 2/12/2019 7:31 pm : link
Do you guys really truly believe that DG and the giants are telling people that Murray is too small? Do you really fucking believe that shit?

Get the fuck over yourself. Seriously.
RE: robbie  
djm : 2/12/2019 7:36 pm : link
In comment 14293742 Go Terps said:
Quote:
Why are we so comfortable saying Gettleman had a great draft? What is that based on? There is only one guy that we can safely say is a very good player - Barkley - and I think arguments can be made that he was not the right pick given the Giants' situation. But even if you ignore that, what do we know about the other guys?

And further, did this draft class do anything to positively impact the team's identity? We weren't a good running team, we weren't a good passing team. We didn't run block or pass block well. We didn't rush the passer well, and we didn't stop the run well. The QB we drafted was a disaster and mocked by the head coach. So where did one of the rookies come in and make a great impact?

If you want to look at a team we know had a great draft, go look at Indy. Their rookie offensive linemen changed the identity of their offense, and Leonard was one of the best defensive players in the entire league, let alone amongst the rookies. The Colts went from 4-12 to 10-6 in a year in part because of their draft class. THAT is a great draft.


My god...... So if a team loses that automatically renders that same year’s draft as inconsequential or ineffective? Have you lost your fuckng mind?

Barkley and Hernandez and hill were terrific looking rookies. Fact. Carter was a solid rookie for where he was picked. Could Barkley, hill or Hernandez regress? Could they get hurt ? Of course! But right now those picks look terrific.

You’re trolling. I have no other explanation.
RE: Yeah I no longer bother anymore  
djm : 2/12/2019 7:54 pm : link
In comment 14293879 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
I used to spend a lot of time in these debates but it’s pointless. We will find out in September, the pissing match about who’s smarter is old.


It really is old. I find myself feeling guilty after blasting opinions and or posters like i just did but I can’t help but get worked up. And I do value those same posters. I shouldn’t get that nasty.... I’ll leave it that.

PS the media is full of shit right now.
RE: RE: Another viewpoint  
djm : 2/12/2019 7:58 pm : link
In comment 14293958 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
In comment 14293694 Defenderdawg said:


Quote:


Michael Lombardi (@mlombardiNFL)
2/11/19, 4:24 PM
The Giants have used the same grading system since George Young took over and in that system, they would have a hard time giving Murray a high grade. the system is designed to prevent the team from being small--its all about size and speed.



This is false. They've always been about size, but not speed. They're ok with big, slow linebackers.


Yet they drafted a smallish TE known for his athletic abilities more than size or strength.

Sigh..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 7:59 pm : link
I have to post this way too much since it seems to not have sunk in. What Gettleman did in Carolina:

Quote:
the Panthers have been forward-thinking in integrating the information with coaching and scouting, despite being an organization that has two guys with old-school résumés running the show: head coach Ron Rivera and GM Dave Gettleman. The Panthers have adopted advanced game theory, evident in the way they've approached fourth down, and they also dispatch two employees to the Sloan Conference every year. The team has worked to develop its own system in-house with a staff that includes two full-time analysts, three full-time developers and three others with analytics prominent among their duties.


Should I bold the part about game theory for emphasis, or are we going to continue to be barraged with shit about chess?

Everytime you open your yap about Gettleman it is like you're being intentionally obtuse:

Quote:
Many, many companies even separate out their innovation areas because of people like Gettleman. There isn't any evidence we have people in the building with any of these skills let alone an assortment.


and yet - you keep asserting others don't know what the fuck they are talking about. Brutal
...  
christian : 2/12/2019 8:18 pm : link
The Giants could have vans stuffed full of PhDs in the parking lot -- but if Shurmur's going to manage the clock and time outs like a 5th grader it doesn't matter.

I'd almost be less worried if the Giants didn't have a functioning data and analytical science team. That would at least excuse it.
To all the luddites out there  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 8:33 pm : link
there is a difference between attempting to do something technologically advanced and doing it effectively. To do something effectively stars with someone preferably at the top internally with real technical skills.

The fact that the Giants don’t have anyone like that is extremely concerning. Even if he did do something legitimately differentiating in Carolina he should want to do the same thing in New York. And there is just zero evidence of that based on who works for the team and how he talks about it publicly.

We are talking about the Giants here. Not the Panthers. And regardless of what you are talking about if he was doing such a great job of mixing old and new school like you suggest he wouldn’t have been fired and he certainly wouldn’t have been out of a job for a year. Luddites seem to want to make the same points over and over, it’s very much in character for them.

It doesn’t matter that he got fired, it doesn’t matter that the Giants failed to demonstrate even a basic understanding in applied game theory in taking timeouts, it doesn’t matter that he insults analytics, it doesn’t matter that reporter said the giants haven’t really evolved their scouting, it doesn’t matter that the Giants scouting department staying almost entirely in tact supporting this, it doesn’t matter that the giants don’t have anyone on their staff who even has a demonstrated knowledge of databases let alone advanced math, systems architecture or any number of things you need to build an effective analytics program.

It only matters to certain luddites that someone hired some developers at their last job (it’s 2018, most company’s have developers) and a few of them went to Sloan which literally every team should go to.

The point has always been that there is a difference between someone making an attempt in the past at developing a program and a commitment today to developing a program that has a real edge. Which there just isn’t much evidence of right now with the Giants.

But luddites seem to want to try to move the argument around all the time when the only argument that matters is whether the Giants are commuting to this, myself and some of the other analytics professionals on this board have suggested this is not the case today.

Until luddites have some real evidence that the Giants really do intend to commit to technology that can make them leaders at some point in the future or at least close the gap they should really shut up and stop being the insufferable assholes they are.
This guy is employed by the Giants  
Eli Wilson : 2/12/2019 8:51 pm : link
Tyseer Siam
Football Operations/Data Analytics

I don't know, sounds like an analytics guy to me
LOL.  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 8:55 pm : link
At least "luddites" have their facts straight, you pompous idiot. And luddites have to repeat themselves because some fucking dolts fail to comprehend basic shit.

Quote:
We are talking about the Giants here. Not the Panthers. And regardless of what you are talking about if he was doing such a great job of mixing old and new school like you suggest he wouldn’t have been fired and he certainly wouldn’t have been out of a job for a year. Luddites seem to want to make the same points over and over, it’s very much in character for them.


Gettleman was fired for not giving extensions to Thomas Davis and Olsen and he wasn't out of a job for a year, in fact it wasn't even 6 months. He was fired in July and hired in December.

For a guy who seems to espouse so much about what Gettleman doesn't do, you really just don't have a clue. Time and time again.
Classic Luddite move  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 9:14 pm : link
I talk about a bunch of stuff and say how the important thing it what the Giants are doing now and he singles in on one thing to suggest that it invalidates the overall message.

Luddites have been accused of this as well as twisting facts. Summmarizing previous conversations inaccurately is also something that luddites seem to love.

I’m sure luddites will continue to do this. This is what they have to resort to when the main point they are arguing, if the Giants have the right leader to ensure they don’t fall behind technologically they don’t have a lot of evidence for. Making excuses for why someone was fired or the timeline or whatever doesn’t change any of the other things listed or the most important fact that they demonstrated no knowledge of applied game theory in season and they don’t seem to have anyone on staff properly qualified to build these systems.

No..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 9:29 pm : link
the important thing to illustrate is that you continually get facts wrong and continually misrepresent your knowledge on what teams are doing.

It is why you keep referencing the same few people over and over again. You know what they are doing and then extrapolate that to mean that the other teams aren't doing anything.

Once again - at one point in time, you said that Carolina was doing nothing for analytics because you were under the impression that Gettleman shunned them.

Hell, even in your insults, you seemingly don't know shit. You use the word Luddite incorrectly over and over again. And it is yet another thing that is likely lost on you.
Luddites are getting their facts wrong  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 9:39 pm : link
What I said is that there was nothing positive written about their analytics program and other teams were much more notable both in their commitment at the top and their achievements and again you twist and twist that.

I said to luddites many times on previous threads and I’ll repeat again every business uses analytics these days I would never argue the point that teams don’t use data. But there are differences that I have since highlighted many times about having a successful bs unsusessful analytics program while like I have suggested luddites latch onto certain things instead of focusing on the real points because all they want to do is put people down online.

Also I’m not even the only one that refers to Gettleman and his supporters as luddites anymore. It’s nice to annoy people that would seem to prefer if the Giants fell further and further behind other teams on technology than they already are.

LOL..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 9:54 pm : link
You aren't??

Quote:
Also I’m not even the only one that refers to Gettleman and his supporters as luddites anymore


There are others who refer to Gettleman supporters as "luddites"? Holy shit - you are making stuff up again!

You point blank said that Gettleman didn't use analytics in the aftermath of his comments. Again - that was the Genesis for me to enter this stupid banter. Basically, you have spent the past year slamming Gettleman for a comment he made about analytics and refused to back down. Now, you are labeling anyone who disagrees with that as a luddite? People who support the GM are opposed to new technology?

I'll stick with my insult of you being a pompous ass. It fits and is actually accurate.
Stimulating set of posts  
Jimmy Googs : 2/12/2019 10:15 pm : link
to say the least...
And here we go with as the luddite turns  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 10:51 pm : link
Jcn56 and I believe GoTerps have both also used the term luddite to describe Gettleman and his merry band of loyalists.

Here you go using another luddite whack a mole tactic. I refute another point and out pops another luddite point to again try to undermine the whole argument we are talking about which is if the Giants are doing enough technologically which again you don't address.

But sure, let's keep playing luddite whack a mole.

“Football is about watching film when they’re between the white lines,” Gettleman said. “You’ve got to be patient and you have to watch. And the other part of it is, you have to know what you are looking for.”

That's a Gettleman quote posted earlier in this thread. He also has mocked analytics publicly yet you want to pretend i'm way off base to think that he might have invested in these things but still not leverage them. I want to reiterate when I first brought this up in a thread I gave very specific examples to show the lack of understanding of game theory and how if they couldn't even demonstrate that it shatters any confidence that they use any analytics at all. If they do, they really shouldn't be if they can't get simple game theory right and their staffing again, does not suggest they have anyone on it that comprehends game theory let alone how to apply it.

But you want to point to a quote telling me that our luddite GM understands how to leverage advanced game theory. Perhaps your point would be more valid and believable if we saw the Giants under his leadership grasp simple game theory. And as I've pointed out in the past http://https://edjsports.com/ sells this information so if our Chief Luddite in charge can't build a team to do this he should stop being such a luddite and simply buy it and use it and stop fucking this up right in front of our eyes.

Understand the difference between even paying for analytics and using them as a part of your decision making. Again the poor use of timeouts points to not using analytics no matter how many people in the building are generating them. There is evidence that we don't put the budget into them that other teams, which again points to an unwillingness to use them as you really need to generate quality ones to get use out of them and that takes time and resources beyond the talent we've invested in.

You see a team like the Patriots who have been doing very well making anlytics a key part of their process. There is plenty of evidence that they are not only not a key part of our process but we don't even have the right person in the building to start a discussion of when to use them or not, which pretty much means they are not being used.

But twist words luddite, that's what luddites do. Luddites love to lose arguments and try to rehash them pretending all these points weren't already made on different threads. Cherry picking information to serve their really poorly supported luddite theories. Nothing encapsulates your luddite cause quite like taking a sigular piece of information or part of a larger message and pretending like this invalidates the larger point that you continue to not address.

So yes luddite, continue to luddite away in your simple luddite world pretending you have actual legitimate points to make when you are just a sad troll that picks on people dumber than you. When you actually encounter someone that can debate you in the same fashion you treat others they are of course pompous. I've really just matched your debate style here luddite. No more, no less.
I don't think..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 2/12/2019 11:01 pm : link
you realize that a Luddite shuns technology. That's their definition. They don't twist words. Hell, they probably don't even use the Internet. And if there is a movement of people calling those who support Gettleman "luddites" then it isn't here.

You've been shown time and again to spew incorrect facts and assumptions, so the best you can do is incorrectly use a term. Sort of fits the MO

Isn't it about time for you to list how qualified you are to speak on analytics again? That's next in the cycle of dumbassery, correct?
Oh wow getting desperate here  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 11:08 pm : link
the luddite has left is to attack the term luddite. It's meant to be ironic you luddite jackass. Real luddites don't use computers.

I proved all I needed to when I actually listed a full architecture for this problem. No need to puff up my credentials when I listed the blueprint online to actually do this which was confirmed to be valid approach by someone else in my field.

Luddite whack a mole it is! What other minor point will you move to next instead of addressing the main which is again that the Giants haven't demonstrated the kind of commitment to technology that many other teams have and that should scare you but it doesn't because you'd rather be smelling Gettleman's farts.

I hope proving my points about you and looking stupid is fun for you. This is definitely fun for me.
Or wait before the luddite attacks my word choice  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 11:12 pm : link
let me say that hyperbole was the better choice than ironic. So please let's whack a mole luddite something else.
This is also going to be difficult for luddites to understand  
NoGainDayne : 2/12/2019 11:19 pm : link
but i've been saying luddite because I wanted to keep my word about not addressing a certain particular luddite that shall remain nameless ever again.

So this particular luddite as well as others that share his view that we should seemingly stand by and watch our favorite team fall behind on technology get to have their actions grouped together as one shitty unproductive point to take up.

Why does Gettleman need to even be defended so ardently in the first place? He has the job already. The team had another shitty season. We are picking 6th in the draft but 3 of those wins were against backup QBs and another 2 were against teams picking lower than us (one of them also a team picking lower than us with a 3rd string QB) Why such a deep need to defend this man and this team?

It's just because luddite Giant fans like the taste of Gettleman farts. It's the only logical conclusion to be drawn.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 <<Prev | Show All |  Next>>
Back to the Corner